Climbing the Spitball Wall - An Unsullied's Take on A Song of Ice and Fire - Reading Complete! Now onto Rewatching the Show and Anticipating Season 6!

[Reader of Books]

Not to mention that the next time the vote is taken, his votes have doubled to two.  

 

Or the men at The Wall taking bets about which of the straw-men will get the most arrows.  

 

Another they missed was when Jon had first joined the Free Folk. Sure it was grim and bitter cold, but I had the impression it wasn't all dour. They were heading South as South can go. In many ways it was an adventure and they had cause to be happy, in their own way. Even Mance's singing lightened the mood. Showing some of that would have meant Jon could genuinely be enticed by them as kind of people with some charm. Instead the show had dour Jon walking in the snow for a year and a half and how many viewers thought he had any inner conflict going on about whether to join them or not. The Cave became just a sex scene instead of defining moment.

[nksarmi]

Well I honestly can't wait until shimpy gets into books four and five because well - that's where some of the more interesting compare / contrast stuff will begin.  And you can join us all in the ranks of trying to figure out what the bloody hell it all means with the choices D&D have made.

[Reader of Books]

That doesn't sound right because the sources I've been looking at say they came up with idea in 2006 which is after AFFC came out.

 

Spoiler is a link to a Variety interview with them that says 2005 

http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/game-of-thrones-ending-season-5-producers-interview-1201469516/

[bobbybuilderton]

Kinda adds to why they decided to call the series Game of Thrones rather than A Song of Ice and Fire.

part of why it annoys me when people call the books the "game of thrones books." NO.

[Delta1212]

Kinda adds to why they decided to call the series Game of Thrones rather than A Song of Ice and Fire.

Eh, I can understand why they did that from a purely marketing perspective. Game of Thrones is a better TV show title than A Song of Ice and Fire.

[WindyNights]

part of why it annoys me when people call the books the "game of thrones books." NO.

And now many of the books are marketed as the Game of Thrones series

: l

[nksarmi]

But I do think calling it Game of Thrones does put a very different emphasis on the show - it's practically broadcasting to book readers that this show is more about the political maneuvering than the core subject matter of the books (which are steeped in magic/fantasy).

 

I mean the key to the whole series seems to hang on what "Song of Ice and Fire" refers to - is it the Song of Lyanna and Rhaegar making the whole series all about Jon?  Or is it the song of Ice (Jon) and Fire (Dany)?  Or is it some kind of reference to the gods with Ice being a reference to whatever is going on with the White Walkers and fire being Mel's Lord of Light? 

 

There are just so many possible interpretations to what the title means whereas Game of Thrones really only refers to one thing.

 

Though I have to say (book spoiler, not for shimpy):

With the show's emphasis on political maneuvering - I just cannot understand at all the changes they made to Dorne and Doran's long-term scheme.

[feverfew]

You know, I end up chatting with Mya on FB about this kind of stuff so I get a chance to really consider my opinions on this, and I have to say that at this point I would put them down in the "They have failed" column if it wasn't for the fact that they clearly aren't trying to tell the same story.  

 

I don't know why that is.  I don't know if they embraced the notion that scifi/fantasy cannot thrive with a large audience which  ....I'm sorry, it's just not true...the stagnation of science fiction/fantasy as a genre doesn't have to do with a lack of audience interest.  I truly believe it doesn't.  It just that there came a point where there was a perception that it was a niche audience for TV, and so the networks with the worst programming practices tended to pick it up the genre.  

 

[...]

 

The story, as it stood on HBO, made me kind of wonder "Uh...what is the lure of this for so many people?  It is a pitiless, merciless, sad story....how do you keep people interested in something bleak for that long? 

 

I got my answer but it's sort of troubling one as it concerns the TV series:  They ditched interesting things so that we could concentrate on a different kind of genre: horror.   Season five spoiler

burning a little girl alive...which is clearly not going to happen in the book and it wasn't even what I suspect, a swap out for Edric Storm rather than depict fantasy, magic, horns of winter?

 I don't claim to understand the choices.  

 

But boy, they decided to both up the Horror and Bland up the story a lot.   Mance Rayder onscreen?  Not riveting stuff.  Mance Rayder at the end of this book revealing that he had a way to bring that wall Tumbling down, but that they all needed that Wall?  Riveting fucking stuff and they ditched it. 

I'm sorry you feel that way, Shimpy, because I still feel that the show has a lot of qualities - and I enjoy reading what you think of it. Does it mean you won't watch season 6? I still believe the show is on the same path as the books; it'll just be a shorter, less complicated journey. Regarding the bleakness, I think of the show as a play: Right now we're still in act 2, and things look terrible for our heroes. It'll get better, I'm sure of it :) Spoilers NOT for Shimpy:

The only thing that'll make me throw things at my screen will be if we won't get a variation of Frey pies.

 

Regarding your season five spoiler,

I'm not so sure we won't get that in the books either. No, scratch that: I'm one hundred percent sure she'll burn. I'm just not sure how it'll come about.

 

 

I think many people have forgotten this because of GOT's massive succes, but when they started out in season 1, fantasy wasn't mainstream popular on tv. I remember several articles quoting D&D saying that Game of Thrones were The Sopranos in Middle Earth. So I think they made a commitment to the court intrigues and the politics of man, rather than the fantasy epic people who read the books were expecting. And once they were on that path, they couldn't turn back....

But I do think calling it Game of Thrones does put a very different emphasis on the show - it's practically broadcasting to book readers that this show is more about the political maneuvering than the core subject matter of the books (which are steeped in magic/fantasy).

 

I mean the key to the whole series seems to hang on what "Song of Ice and Fire" refers to - is it the Song of Lyanna and Rhaegar making the whole series all about Jon?  Or is it the song of Ice (Jon) and Fire (Dany)?  Or is it some kind of reference to the gods with Ice being a reference to whatever is going on with the White Walkers and fire being Mel's Lord of Light? 

 

There are just so many possible interpretations to what the title means whereas Game of Thrones really only refers to one thing.

 

Though I have to say (book spoiler, not for shimpy):

With the show's emphasis on political maneuvering - I just cannot understand at all the changes they made to Dorne and Doran's long-term scheme.

Dorne was a massive disappointment for just that reason: I found the Sand Snakes / Arianna plotting tiresome and annoying, but Doran's speech was everything! I still hold out hope that the show will do him justice in the next season. *crosses all my fingers and toes*

Edited November 1, 2015 by feverfew

[Delta1212]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Shimpy, because I still feel that the show has a lot of qualities - and I enjoy reading what you think of it. Does it mean you won't watch season 6? I still believe the show is on the same path as the books; it'll just be a shorter, less complicated journey. Regarding the bleakness, I think of the show as a play: Right now we're still in act 2, and things look terrible for our heroes. It'll get better, I'm sure of it :) Spoilers NOT for Shimpy:

The only thing that'll make me throw things at my screen will be if we won't get a variation of Frey pies.

Regarding your season five spoiler,

I'm not so sure we won't get that in the books either. No, scratch that: I'm one hundred percent sure she'll burn. I'm just not sure how it'll come about.

I think many people have forgotten this because of GOT's massive succes, but when they started out in season 1, fantasy wasn't mainstream popular on tv. I remember several articles quoting D&D saying that Game of Thrones were The Sopranos in Middle Earth. So I think they made a commitment to the court intrigues and the politics of man, rather than the fantasy epic people who read the books were expecting. And once they were on that path, they couldn't turn back....

Dorne was a massive disappointment for just that reason: I found the Sand Snakes / Arianna plotting tiresome and annoying, but Doran's speech was everything! I still hold out hope that the show will do him justice in the next season. *crosses all my fingers and toes*

Well, I think the main similarity between the show and the books in that plotline is that

Doran is the best part of Dorne in both. It's just that he does basically fuck all on the show

[WindyNights]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Shimpy, because I still feel that the show has a lot of qualities - and I enjoy reading what you think of it. Does it mean you won't watch season 6? I still believe the show is on the same path as the books; it'll just be a shorter, less complicated journey. Regarding the bleakness, I think of the show as a play: Right now we're still in act 2, and things look terrible for our heroes. It'll get better, I'm sure of it :) Spoilers NOT for Shimpy:

The only thing that'll make me throw things at my screen will be if we won't get a variation of Frey pies.

Regarding your season five spoiler,

I'm not so sure we won't get that in the books either. No, scratch that: I'm one hundred percent sure she'll burn. I'm just not sure how it'll come about.

I think many people have forgotten this because of GOT's massive succes, but when they started out in season 1, fantasy wasn't mainstream popular on tv. I remember several articles quoting D&D saying that Game of Thrones were The Sopranos in Middle Earth. So I think they made a commitment to the court intrigues and the politics of man, rather than the fantasy epic people who read the books were expecting. And once they were on that path, they couldn't turn back....

Dorne was a massive disappointment for just that reason: I found the Sand Snakes / Arianna plotting tiresome and annoying, but Doran's speech was everything! I still hold out hope that the show will do him justice in the next season. *crosses all my fingers and toes*

GRRM has said that he has the right to change his mind and his plot points aren't set in stone. He just won't change them just to shock people. They have to grow out of his characters.

He's already mentioned

coming up with a twist that the show can't replicate due to decisions they've made with this character. Maybe Shireen ends up on the Iron Throne after all.

And he's already said that there are characters that are dead on the show that will live in the books to the end.

Honestly it's not that the journey is shorter and less complicated. It's that journey is completely different with the book series ending tacked on which may or may not make sense considering all the gymnastics and idiot balls they had to hand to get Sansa hitched to Ramsay.

[Hecate7]

How cool would it be if there WAS a dragon at Winterfell and when the last Stark left, he/she left as well?  Brings new meaning to "there must always be a Stark at Winterfell."

 

I was just thinking that exact same thing! Poor dragon. I bet that's what's going on.

[mrspidey]

I thought for sure I'd reached the "Oh, that must be the big thing!" when -- kind of very importantly -- when Tyrion and Jaime part with what amounts to a "See you in hell after vengeance is mine!" [...]

I mean, that's a gigantic character note to just freaking skip. HUGE. "Hi, my family shaped my entire adult life with a lie and the one person I thought cared about me and loved me participated in it." There's a big difference in those two character trajectories. A really, really big difference. Show Tyrion had the only real love he'd ever known in the form of Shae, viciously turn on him because she felt betrayed by him" which to be kind of clear on something, he absolutely did betray her. He had told her loved her and then he used the one thing he thought of as her biggest fear to get her to leave. All because he was too selfish to send her away when he should have and too selfish to leave with her when she asked him too.

When the story was changed to "Shae truly loves Tyrion, but it angers her that he has to marry and she hates that she can only be considered his sex worker, they will never have emotional equity" and then she betrays him at the trial and he finds her in Tywin's bed: Tyrion has given Shae reason to hate him. They achieved the worst kind of emotional equity: They both betrayed a mutual love and he kills her for that. Did he have to kill her? Absolutely, she was screaming for the guard.

It just still hugely significant that the Show switches the emotional impact in Show Verse it is Shae who is in Book Tyrion's emotional shoes. She thought she was truly loved and then a lie -- supposedly told to protect her and told far too late for it to work -- but they break each other's hearts rather deliberately and cruelly on both sides.

So Show Tyrion comes off as almost unbearably self-pitying in all of that, because I didn't feel sorry for him when he sat on the floor saying, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry" after murdering Shae -- no matter how necessary -- it was more "dude, what in the world did you expect? She tried to be your lover and would have died in the course of it, but in a last ditch attempt to save her, you used her greatest fear against her....and so she became the thing you made her believe she was: Just your paid companion, no loyalty, no love, no honor."

Book Tyrion? Oh my god, that's a different story entirely and it completely changes his motivations and the way to process them. It finally becomes important that Tyrion would not rape Sansa. Like I've said, I don't hand out hero points for being a good enough dude to not rape your terrified, forced into marriage, child-bride" and that's before considering the "and your family murdered pretty much all of her family" of it all. However, it's important to Tyrion to view himself as the kind of man who will not stoop to that. He actually does desperately want Sansa to fall in love with him. He has feelings for Shae, but he's not really fooled into believing she loves him: He believes himself to be essentially unlovable.

To then find out: No, you were loved. You had a wife. At a very young age you found the person who did love you for more than your name. Then members of your family, including the only one you trusted and thought cared about you, lied to you to make you feel unloveable and in doing so not only shaped your entire life: Surprise! You raped the one woman who did love you.

That's an epic level of betrayal because it doesn't just emotionally maim the man, it takes away the one part of his self-image that has some importance to him: He would not stoop to raping a woman, in a world where consent was barely even considered an issue, he was the man who actually gave a crap about Sansa's consent. Jaime didn't just hand him a historical: Oh, hey, sorry for that life-changing, soul-curdling, heart-crushing I participated in. I thought it wouldn't matter and was for your own good." Nope, it retroactively changes an aspect of his self-image.

That was a stupid, stupid thing to do in terms of storytelling.

This needs to be framed, packaged and sent to D&D because it just oozes ultimate truth. I was much more infuriated by this change than I was at the lack of UnCat.

I mean, I can see why they made the whole thing about Shae. She was a part of the show and the audience felt connected to the character, whereas Tysha was just some sort of background noise. So that's where they were probably coming from. I just think the consequences of the Tysha reveal are way too significant to leave it out.

Because in the show, Bran tells the Rat King story. So they include that....and nothing comes of it. NOTHING.

Not yet and not in the show, anyway. ;)

You should really keep that story in mind, though.

[Holmbo]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Shimpy, because I still feel that the show has a lot of qualities - and I enjoy reading what you think of it. Does it mean you won't watch season 6? I still believe the show is on the same path as the books; it'll just be a shorter, less complicated journey. Regarding the bleakness, I think of the show as a play: Right now we're still in act 2, and things look terrible for our heroes. It'll get better, I'm sure of it :) Spoilers NOT for Shimpy:

The only thing that'll make me throw things at my screen will be if we won't get a variation of Frey pies.

 

Honestly it's not that the journey is shorter and less complicated. It's that journey is completely different with the book series ending tacked on which may or may not make sense considering all the gymnastics and idiot balls they had to hand to get Sansa hitched to Ramsay.

 

This feels like the no 1 question for show vs book comparison and I'm guessing by now there are readers all over the spectrum from "the show and book are taking completely different paths and not even the most basic aspect of the ending will be the same" to "the show and book are essentially the same and the plots introduced in the book which have not come up on the show are either leading nowhere or the show will get to them eventually".

 

My place in the spectrum falls somewhere in the middle, leaning towards "the same" side if I'm being optimistic. I believe the factor that it comes down to is how much details GRRM has told D&D. We know he's told them the basic facts of the ending, I'm assuming the faith of the main characters, what happens at the wall, who ends up on the throne. But I'm not sure he's been giving about the less major beats of the story, possibly because he doesn't know everything himself yet, he has described his writing as gardening. So the question is really have GRRM told the showrunners things like:

-Who is Aegon (faegon?) and what is his entire arch in the series?

-Do the northern lords have a plan? What will come of it?

-What does SH do through the rest of the story?

-What does every character in Dorne do in the rest of the story?

If he told them such details then I think the overall story will be the same in that the same major plot points will happen, the things that has yet to be introduced on the show are either red herrings or it will come up later. Most characters, except for the minor ones, will have the same end game even though the paths to get them there will be different. But if he didn't tell them, if he hasn't decided himself yet how all his set ups will pay off, then I think the show and book will likely be vastly different and major plot points and characters faiths will be entirely different.

We might never get to know which one it is since it's uncertain if we ever get the book ending.

Does anyone else have major problems with the spoiler markings? I put them around everything and it leaves stuff hanging out so I have to edit and try several times to get it all to stay in there.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Holmbo

[Mya Stone]

Holmbo - you can always manually type it in as [ spoiler]

[ /spoiler]

Removing the spaces.

I edited a couple of posts that got too suggestive, also. Let's avoid being completely specific about certain

payoffs involving baked goods

that happen, please and thank you.

[Terra Nova]

Hello everyone! I am a long, long time BookWalker lurker (on westeros.org, and from there and its Unsullied monitoring thread on TVwoP, so I really ‘know’ a lot of people here already, like Protar or Colonel Green, and Shimpy herself of course :) ).

 

Soooo, although I tend to lurk much more than to participate actively in discussions, I had to register and post here just to ask Shimpy some questions:

 

- some final remarks on Daenerys? Even though her arc was adapted pretty straightforwardly on the show, the overall feeling of her last chapter and the circumstances for Jorah’s banishment are pretty different.

 

- at the end of the current book, which characters do you think have been improved on the show? Which ones have been given horrendous disservice? Until now, of course :)

 

 

Personally, season 4 finale really sealed the deal for me, I wasn’t even that surprised about Tysha’s reveal being left out or Tyrion killing Shae in self-defense, but I always maintained that UnCat reveal should have been at the end of season four. That was the last straw in a very, very long series of poor decisions that damaged Cat as a character (whose portrayal on screen, IMHO, still colors some of Shimpy’s opinions about her).

 

 

Regarding the Tyrion/Tysha debate of the last page:

There were many ways things could have been worked better than what we got: I understand and support to some extent that events that happened off-screen do not really have the same impact as in a book; so, it seems to me that they tried to turn Shae into the one female that shapes Tyrion's views on himself and women, and that's fine.

 

They could have simply had Tyrion being freed by Varys, both of them going through the tunnels and Varys sneakily informed him that they were close to Tywin’s quarters (as in the book); Tyrion goes on his killing rampage (with Shae acting like in the books and begging him to save her from his father), comes back and only at this point meets Jaime. Before parting and knowing they won’t probably meet again, Jaime has something to confess: Tywin convinced/forced Shae to testify against Tyrion, thus sealing the trial and being sure that Tyrion will be exiled and Jaime will take his place as heir to Casterly Rock. Jaime knew but didn’t tell Tyrion, assuming it would have been better for him, bound to the Wall, not to know that there was someone genuinely in love with him, but now he’s feeling remorseful and has to spill the beans. At this point show!Tyrion realizes that someone indeed loved him truly, and he just killed her in cold blood. Furious at Jaime, he claims to have killed Joffrey and tells him what truly Cersei is. Varys and Tyrion board on the ship, the bells start ringing, reaction shot of a crushed Jaime that understands what those mean. Or something along these lines :)

It truly retains most of the focal thematic point of the book, in my opinion, doesn’t deprive Jaime of character development (Nicolaj Coster-Waldau has the skills for such a scene), and doesn’t turn Shae in the scorned woman cliché. The only problem would have been the darker light cast on Tyrion, something the showrunners couldn’t abide. So down with what we got, all played with the lenses of ‘poor Tyrion!’. The load was such that, as Shimpy said, Tyrion really comes off as a self-absorbed, self-pitying jerk, but I’m sure this was only an unfortunate side-effect and not the aim of the showrunners. Also, this particular scene showed how they really consider the whole story as a list of plot point to be checked: after completely transforming Shae's character, she still ends up doing exactly what her book counterpart did. Also, they are more than willing to change completely entire story arcs when it suits them, so a different ending for this would have been possible, and even fine for me, as long as the thematic integrity was kept. 

 

 

As for whether to continue with the fourth book or read the novellas, I’m totally for the Dunk&Egg stories: following the publishing order is, in my opinion, the best course, as it also provide a small beat from the very dense last half of Storm of Swords.
Further motivations for book readers only:

 

In Feast there’s the story of the black dragon rusted to red on the Quiet Isle, the shield Brienne saw in her father’s armory, in Dance there’s the whole clusterfuck of fAegon, the Golden Company, Bloodraven, Jaime’s trip to Pennytree and Hoster the Hostage stories… all of this HAS to be read after the novellas.
Also, Haleth, not-really-Mance bonfire happens in Dance. And I want to see Shimpy read of the real, nice Brienne and bash the show, muahahahahahah!

 

 

Actually, best thing would be to read the first two, then A Feast for Crows, then the last novella and A Dance with Dragons.

[feverfew]

GRRM has said that he has the right to change his mind and his plot points aren't set in stone. He just won't change them just to shock people. They have to grow out of his characters.

He's already mentioned

coming up with a twist that the show can't replicate due to decisions they've made with this character. Maybe Shireen ends up on the Iron Throne after all.

And he's already said that there are characters that are dead on the show that will live in the books to the end.

Honestly it's not that the journey is shorter and less complicated. It's that journey is completely different with the book series ending tacked on which may or may not make sense considering all the gymnastics and idiot balls they had to hand to get Sansa hitched to Ramsay.

But if he changes his mind in the future, we can't really blame D&D for not changing with him, can we? They are bound by time restrictions, and can't just twiddle their thumbs while Martin decides who lives and who dies. I mean, I'm pretty sure the show will be over at least six years before we'll see the last book, and if Martin changes his mind on who sit on the Iron Throne after the show's over, it's not really D&D's fault if the stories don't line up. Obviously D&D have changed things that in my opinion wasn't necessary, simplified storylines to a degree where the emotional payoff has lost some of it's punch, but I already knew that would happen when I started watching the show. That is the nature of an adaption. As far as dead characters go, I'm also pretty sure Martin was talking about minor characters like  Pyp or (season five spoiler)

Barristan (who - no matter how much you like his badass self - is a minor character in the grand scheme of things)

. I still believe major characters like (season five spoiler)

Stannis, Selyse and Shireen (who, while not being major characters themselves, massively influences what happens to Stannis. And before you charge me with inconsistency, Barristan did not have the same influence on Dany's storyline. IMHO, of course :)) will die in the books too.

 

 I respect that you and several others feel that the show has diverged too much from the books to ever make sense, I just don't feel the same way. I remain ever hopeful that season five was a single misfire, and that the show will return strong now Feast and Dance are out of the way. (I'm actually grateful we'll loose several plot and character beats from the book - storylines I felt muddied up the water.) But I really enjoy discussing this with you guys - as I said before, you make me rethink stuff.

This feels like the no 1 question for show vs book comparison and I'm guessing by now there are readers all over the spectrum from "the show and book are taking completely different paths and not even the most basic aspect of the ending will be the same" to "the show and book are essentially the same and the plots introduced in the book which have not come up on the show are either leading nowhere or the show will get to them eventually".

 

My place in the spectrum falls somewhere in the middle, leaning towards "the same" side if I'm being optimistic. I believe the factor that it comes down to is how much details GRRM has told D&D. We know he's told them the basic facts of the ending, I'm assuming the faith of the main characters, what happens at the wall, who ends up on the throne. But I'm not sure he's been giving about the less major beats of the story, possibly because he doesn't know everything himself yet, he has described his writing as gardening. So the question is really have GRRM told the showrunners things like:

-Who is Aegon (faegon?) and what is his entire arch in the series?

-Do the northern lords have a plan? What will come of it?

-What does SH do through the rest of the story?

-What does every character in Dorne do in the rest of the story?

If he told them such details then I think the overall story will be the same in that the same major plot points will happen, the things that has yet to be introduced on the show are either red herrings or it will come up later. Most characters, except for the minor ones, will have the same end game even though the paths to get them there will be different. But if he didn't tell them, if he hasn't decided himself yet how all his set ups will pay off, then I think the show and book will likely be vastly different and major plot points and characters faiths will be entirely different.

We might never get to know which one it is since it's uncertain if we ever get the book ending.

 

This. Like you, I fall right down the middle. It all depends on how far Martin is with the outline for the coming books - and how well he'll stick to said outline. For people adapting a book series that hasn't been written yet, it must be terrifying when the author is a gardening-type, not an architect (it must be terrifying being the editor too). Hopefully Martin is kind enough to give fair warning to D&D if he changes something massive; at least as a courtesy if the show is too far along to revise the story. (Future spoiler for the books)

Garlan and Willas spring to mind. I'm not sure they had any serious significance before at least during Dance, when Martin started talking about them in interviews.

[Terra Nova]

@ feverfew

 

Spoiler from season six rumors:

 

too bad that they are bringing the Ironborn back, with all the Kingsmoot, Euron arrival and Yarasha exile. That leaked set pictures show Riverrun's siege, complete with the gallows for Edmure. That casting calls are for Northern Lords, most probably at least Umbers and Karstarks, for what seems a hybrid between Septon Meribald and the other septon whatshisname at the Quiet Isle, and for what seems the fallen Brotherhood, or that the actors from the Vale storyline are confirmed to come back and that there are talks of Jaime in the Riverlands. They are bringing back everything they left out in the last season, all that was easily labelled as the boooooooring! part of Feast and Dance. Sansa is almost certainly coming back to her original storyline, after her rapey detour without consequence.

[ambi76]

I guess we are unfortunately drifting into show hating territory again so I will say this: How D&D manage to produce this monster on such short time is unbelievable, the casting is very good and the music is absolutely fantastic. I really liked the first three seasons. D&D loved the story of book 1-3. They never thought they would get more than three seasons and only planned up to the RW initally. And that I can't stand much anything from the show after this might be because of that.

 

When it became clear that this show would not be cancelled ever, it seems to me that they didn't quite know what to do at first. They are obviously in the majority of fandom with not being at all happy about the last two books. They said they like the ending GRRM told them about though, which I'm not sure if it should make me afraid or hopefull that while season 4-6(7) will probably always be "Lalala I can't hear you!" territory for me, I might be able to enjoy the last one again. They pretty much oughtright said that the middle part will be more of an PU/AU than an adaption. I love fanfiction but hate PU/AU's (if it's not some minor tweak, one more high school AU or college AU where Loras is a fashion designer instead of a soldier and I'll turn into the Mountain) so there is that. I will not watch season 6 and hope TWOW comes out before, but I would have never even learned about ASOIAF if not for the show and that will always be in its favour.

Edited November 1, 2015 by ambi76

[nksarmi]

Well I'm not sure that books four and five are totally done on the show - that's why I won't talk about some of the things that are in them to my viewing partner because I think some things will still end up in the show.  Now I don't have enough of a poker face to hide my looks of shock or confusion when the show kills off a character "early" or diverges really far from the books like (ok tagging this because shimpy told me to lol - but while it is a season five spoiler, I don't think it is any way spoils book six because I am 99% sure it will never happen in the books.... )

marrying Sansa to Ramsey

.  But I have bit my tongue on things that I think *might* still make it in.

 

The biggest problem I see with the show's tendency to change stories is that they often want to take the characters back and hit the same big plot points of the books - but things no longer make sense.  Others have pointed this out in other threads.  The one we can best discuss here with shimpy is Tyrion's relationship with Shae, Tyrion's killing of Tywin, and his and Jamie's parting. 

 

To me, by taking out the Tisha reveal, Tyrion going to confront his father doesn't really make much sense. Why didn't he just high tail it the hell out of there?

 

Also, why in the world was Shae in Tywin's bed at that point?  On the show, they changed her from a whore who went from one employer to another (and you are even given to wonder if she as always in Tywin's employ) to a woman who truly loved Tyrion.  I don't care if she was enough of a woman scorned to lie and condemn Tyrion to his death (which is really rather extream even for a broken hearted woman) - I'm not sure she would be willingly sleeping with her former love's father at that point.  And if she had no choice, they did NOT play the scene that way.

 

In the show, they tried to play Shae's as self defense, but they took away all the motivation for killing Tywin.  I mean, when Tyrion kills Tywin in the books - it is definitely for revenge - but shit, it's for something worthy of revenge (the hurt of a young girl who only crime was that she dared to be lowborn and love Tyrion).  I think that's why Tywin's death just feel so flat for me.

 

I think they should have recognized how much they changed the story and when Tyrion was leaving/escaping - Jamie should have told him that Shae was dead at Tywin's order.  If they were going to whitewash Tyrion of Shae's murder anyway, they should have gone ahead and make it Shae's death he avenged when he killed Tywin.  And that same reveal could have given Tyrion a chance to rant at Jamie - telling him it was probably Cersei who had her killed and telling him he should have protected Shae or something like that.  It doesn't have the exact same impact as the Tysha reveal, but it would have been closer emotionally than what we got.

 

And that's actually makes me just conclude that the stories will be different in the end.  The biggest plot points might stay the same, but it won't be the same journey. I think (season five spoiler and author quote about book six so probably NOT for shimpy):

since GRRM has said that Shireen burns, we can anticipate that something like what happened in the show happens in the books, but I fail to see - considering where all the characters are - how it could play out anything close to the way D&D choose to portray it. It would also be sick if GRRM has Shireen survive that burning somehow but D&D didn't because they have dropped so many magical elements from the show.

 

Terra Nova: Regarding season six spoilers:

I actually don't think Sansa will go back to her book 4/5 story at all, but I do think she will advance into whatever her book 6 story would have been - as will Jon and much of the North. I really don't think they can go back and properly recapture what "the North remembers" really meant, but they have to bring in these Northern lords because of what book 6 requires. They DO appear to be giving us an abbreviated version of Jamie in the Riverlands, but I suspect he HAS to be there to unite with Jon/the North against the battle of the undead or to broker peace with the North if before they all fight the undead - there is a fight against Dany in the South. Either way, I think they wasted Jamie in season five but now have to put him where he needs to be for what comes next.

Edited November 1, 2015 by nksarmi

[stillshimpy]

Well part of the reason it doesn't really work to simply shift the bulk of the emotional development of Tyrion's story to Shae is that without learning of Jaime's involvement in the Tysha lie, Tyrion still has members of his family he might otherwise care about: Jaime, his nephew Tommen, Myrcella.  So let's the character of Shae shoulder the emotional development is problematic going forward. 

 

 

 

I'm sorry you feel that way, Shimpy, because I still feel that the show has a lot of qualities - and I enjoy reading what you think of it. Does it mean you won't watch season 6? I still believe the show is on the same path as the books; it'll just be a shorter, less complicated journey. Regarding the bleakness, I think of the show as a play:

 

I assume I actually will watch season six, because my husband wasn't quite as "I am just freaking over this entire story" as I was by the end of season five.  Also, here's the thing from my standpoint:  I completely see what you're saying about the show still having value.  I agree but I do think that it does not stand alone well and also, I was specifically asked if I thought the Show had lived up to what the whole Unsullied litmus test was supposed to be:  Can a series, with ten hours a season, take on such a vast source material and convey it in a way that does it actual justice without any supplemental materials to flesh it out. 

 

I have to go with....not really, in my opinion, having watched five seasons before ever touching anything that would count as supplemental material.  

 

Also, there's an entirely separate and incredibly long argument to be made about HBO (and much of TV) confusing Bleakness for Instant Quality.  "Do you have a dark tale to tell? That's the stuff of high drama!  That's the award winning stuff!" seems to be their mission statement.   It's sort of a long phase in drama -- kind of like the late sixties and early seventies seemed to really prize the Tale of Existential Dilemma -- that seems to reflect the perception of an audience's level of contentment with the world (or lack thereof in this case).    

 

Some dark tales are really worthwhile, but you know, just as in life, there's room for some levity and losing all narrative balance.   I just started to write out all these examples in films, books, etc. when I realized something: I don't need to, the actual books demonstrate an awareness of this and have some balance to them.  No one would ever call them a light read, but Martin actually does understand the need for something resembling a break from the bleakness.  HBO's current lineup suggests that they have confused darkness for high quality.  

 

Then just the further I get into the book series, the more the two tales diverge and they stop resembling each other very closely.  Reading the first book, I confess, was often an act of will because it was a story I largely knew and it was just fleshing out smaller details.  There were a couple of things that were different (Cat tells Ned to go to King's Landing, etc.  , Jaime does not fight Ned in the streets, etc. etc. ) but for the most part, it is essentially the same story.  You guys know how this goes, but I'm through three books, and it feels like I've seen much of the material up through season four and I"m shocked at how many storylines just met the cutting room floor or never made it through the script process.   

 

I like to listen to podcasts, so I listened to a fairly lengthy one with Jane Espenson who has written for so many shows and discussed all the writer's rooms for the various shows.  Not in some catty way, just about the quality of them.  It came as a surprise for me that Joss Whedon's writer's room for Buffy was actually the quietest.  That he worked with a very internal process and no matter who wrote what script, you were basically trying to adopt that very Whedonesque style.  Unsurprisingly, the writer's room for Battlestar Galactica under Ronald D. Moore was the only one that encouraged each writer to have their own, very distinctive voice and manner of storytelling (and some of BSG reflects why , whereas that is great for writes, it may not be the best thing for the quality of a longterm tale). 

 

Jane Espenson wrote a script for season one of Game of Thrones.  The one where Dany eats the horse's heart.    Here's what she had to say about GoT's writer's room for that first season:  There wasn't one.   She was given her script assignment, directed to the passage in the books it would be covering and she said it was the easiest script she ever wrote.   There's a reason that the first season of Game of Thrones is the most faithful to the source material:  the scripts were written prior to shooting and there was no collective writer's room.   

 

I don't know anything about the showrunners and I actually am not saying they are bad showrunners, or bad people, or anything of the sort.  I don't think they are bad storytellers either, but on the "we're only in Act 2...."  that's not quite how the narrative structure of a TV show can, or should work.  Each season needs to contain a full narrative, because it's stretching a tale over the course of years.   The only time that "Well, yes, but 50 hours into this story, you are only at the end of Act 2 might work for maintaining narrative momentum (<---Key! Very key! Without it you get a CPR dummy in place of a live patient and you're hammering away on thing without any true animating force) is in the age of streaming.  

 

Hi Terra Nova, I will answer all of your questions, I just have been sitting here watching the New Reply alert going off several times while I was typing this and should probably check in before continuing, in case I'm just saying stuff everyone else said.  

 

ETA:

 

I guess we are unfortunately drifting into show hating territory again so I will say this: How D&D manage to produce this monster on such short time is unbelievable, the casting is very good and the music is absolutely fantastic.

 

I just want to point out, again, that I am not saying that I hate the show, or the show runners.  I don't even really know the showrunners names and I do not even come close to disliking them as individuals or storytellers.  I am saying that I do not understand some of their choices, but they took on a beast of a task and I have one step AFTER reading all the books:  I get to finally freaking watch the DVD extras, read some interviews and get a sense of what they were trying to accomplish.  

 

So I'm not judging them and I'm really not through determining my own opinion for all time here either.  I was asked a particular question that I answered from what I know now, at this juncture and I am frustrated by the exclusions, but that's far from saying: I think the show is crap.  I think for every character the show didn't develop particularly well: Tyrion, Sansa they have ones they developed in ways that were better:  Cersei (she makes for a fuller character), even Robb...who like or dislike the Talisa arc....at least he is something more than a 2D cutout of the Upstanding Young Man, Made of Honorable, Good....and occasional teenage horniness.  

 

Yup, Book Robb has more honorable intentions, etc and more sense....but Series Robb feels like a person.  Flawed, bloody-minded (Scottish for Mulish to the point of self-destruction) .  Tywin is the same deal: There was a lot MORE to that character onscreen.   

 

Margaery, Olenna, Theon....I mean, for everything I could point to and say "Here is where i think they fell short" (and boy could I have lived without the Theon Torture Fest) I can also point to things that are much richer onscreen: Theon's character development.  On the screen, I understood that character a lot better than I did book Theon.  I could keep going on, but you guys get the point.  

 

There's balance to be had outside of the question I was asked, you know? 

Edited November 1, 2015 by stillshimpy

[ambi76]

Oh, I wasn't accusing you at all shimpy, more like defending my book-snobby self and some other grumpy people in here.

 

I wouldn't so much put a (-) before Sansa and Tyrion than a (?) and (!) respectively.

 

Your (+) before Cersei I would have to dispute but, as far as we are in the story, can understand.

 

Theon and Robb have definitely improved for me with the show too. So has most mind-bogglingly: Jon Snow.

 

I can't stand show!Marg and Olenna is a bit of a (?) too for me. But here (in Tyrell-land) I'm utterly biased.

Edited November 1, 2015 by ambi76

[stillshimpy]

I can understand those too, Ambi and of course, I just didn't even touch the "Show Tyrells:  Make a composite character in the form of Loras....and that's not even going anywhere near the depiction of his sexuality" because that was one where if were using symbols to express feelings, it's closer to &^@#?!? BAM.  

 

At this point in the books?  Cersei isn't really a character as much as she is a stereotypical evil queen construct (with added incest for some variance).   Similarly, in the books?  Margaery isn't a character yet.  She's a name.  Olenna is very close to being the same deal, she had very little to do in the books, shows up, is frankly creepy and off-putting to me, but her show counterpart is delightful because of the actor hired to play her, who gave the character a much needed sense of fun. 

 

Show Joffrey?  I'm genuinely sorry to know that Jackie Gleeson gave up acting.  He's truly gifted and maybe he'll change his mind, but I doubt it.  Joffrey is another example of "he felt like a person"....Book Shae is also a thin construct, despite my complaints about "shifting the Tysha story to Shae causes X, Y and Z as a problem" at least Show Shae, again, feels like a person. 

 

Oh, I wasn't accusing you at all shimpy, more like defending my book-snobby self and some other grumpy people in here.

 

I do understand, truly, I was just trying to clarify my position.   These are all subjects you guys will have discussed at extreme length, because we're five years deep into the show and decades deep in the fandom for the books.   

 

It's a little bit like being asked about "What's your position on Palestine?"  :  Try to be as clear as humanly possible, because almost everything that could be said on the subject, has been said and every statement can be parsed in any direction, to be further proof of the rightness of a prior argument made about the subject.  When entering into a years long debate on anything with people who already are firmly entrenched in what they think?  I find it best to try and be as clear as humanly possible. 

[bobbybuilderton]

I think the positives of the show are dwarfed by the negatives. For every more fleshed out character we have two that are caricatures of their book self. Don't even get me started on Loras and the overall portrayal of religion compared to the books...

Edited November 1, 2015 by bobbybuilderton

[Holmbo]

@ feverfew

 

Spoiler from season six rumors:

 

too bad that they are bringing the Ironborn back, with all the Kingsmoot, Euron arrival and Yarasha exile. That leaked set pictures show Riverrun's siege, complete with the gallows for Edmure. That casting calls are for Northern Lords, most probably at least Umbers and Karstarks, for what seems a hybrid between Septon Meribald and the other septon whatshisname at the Quiet Isle, and for what seems the fallen Brotherhood, or that the actors from the Vale storyline are confirmed to come back and that there are talks of Jaime in the Riverlands. They are bringing back everything they left out in the last season, all that was easily labelled as the boooooooring! part of Feast and Dance. Sansa is almost certainly coming back to her original storyline, after her rapey detour without consequence.

I haven't followed show news for this season so I'm not updated, but isn't this a good thing then? Ok perhaps not the iron born :D But northern lords being casted, Jaime in the Riverlands, BWB. Surely they will get into Winds during the season and actually get some resolutions, not just the set up (I might regret this statement later since that's how I thought last season would be). If all the characters end up where they are in the books it would mean the whole weird plots of season 5 were just temporary detours ala Yara rescues Theon (including illogical plot which hurts the characterization of the female characters).

 

I guess we are unfortunately drifting into show hating territory again so I will say this: How D&D manage to produce this monster on such short time is unbelievable, the casting is very good and the music is absolutely fantastic. I really liked the first three seasons. D&D loved the story of book 1-3. They never thought they would get more than three seasons and only planned up to the RW initally. And that I can't stand much anything from the show after this might be because of that.

 

When it became clear that this show would not be cancelled ever, it seems to me that they didn't quite know what to do at first. They are obviously in the majority of fandom with not being at all happy about the last two books. They said they like the ending GRRM told them about though, which I'm not sure if it should make me afraid or hopefull that while season 4-6(7) will probably always be "Lalala I can't hear you!" territory for me, I might be able to enjoy the last one again. They pretty much oughtright said that the middle part will be more of an PU/AU than an adaption. I love fanfiction but hate PU/AU's (if it's not some minor tweak, one more high school AU or college AU where Loras is a fashion designer instead of a soldier and I'll turn into the Mountain) so there is that. I will not watch season 6 and hope TWOW comes out before, but I would have never even learned about ASOIAF if not for the show and that will always be in its favour.

I'm not familiar with fanfiction terminology. So AU is alternative universe? But what is PU?

 

I'm not sure yet if I will watch season 6. I'm an all or nothing watcher when it comes to shows so I could never watch it casually. I will at least give it a few episodes before I decide I think.

[stillshimpy]

Should mean Partial Universe, if I'm up to speed on my genre acronyms :-)  I may not be.  ETA: and apparently I wasn't :-)  The whole Hobbit: How many movies can we make out of this influenced my read on that one. 

Edited November 1, 2015 by stillshimpy

[ambi76]

I can understand those too, Ambi and of course, I just didn't even touch the "Show Tyrells:  Make a composite character in the form of Loras....and that's not even going anywhere near the depiction of his sexuality" because that was one where if were using symbols to express feelings, it's closer to &^@#?!? BAM.

 

Hehe.

 

           Loras = Ser Composite Character (not even just Tyrells)

           Margaery = Natalie Boelyn/Margaery Dormer

           Olenna = Dame Diana Rigg in funny clothes

           Mace = WTF? (GRRM actually said show!Mace

is a Harys Swyft replacement and got his character transplanted.

)

;-)

 

AU = Alternative Universe i.e. same characters majorly altered settings

PU = Parallel Universe i.e. same setting but somewhat altered characters

There can be some overlap of course.

Edited November 1, 2015 by ambi76

[Reader of Books]

I think the positives of the show are dwarfed by the negatives. For every more fleshed out character we have two that are caricatures of their book self. Don't even get me started on Loras 

 

Yep, and I would go further. In the vast majority of cases where the positives exist it is because of what the actor brought to the character.

 

Specific examples:

* Charles Dance as Tywin Lannister. He almost had me believe that the '20,000 dead on the battlefield or 12 people at dinner' meant I should forgive him. Smooth as sin and twice as seductive.

* Esme Blanco as Ros. Loved her performance. I was totally on board with the idea of having a composite character here and she did a good job of trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

* Noah Taylor as Locke. My humble applause.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Reader of Books

[stillshimpy]

By the way guys, as I told Mya (which sooner or later I'll have to make a keystroke for that word combo) when it comes to book order, I am going to let you guys decide what's up next.  Sounds like the Dunk and Egg books are really relatively short.  But I just want to do whatever is going to be fun for the greatest number of people.   

 

Terra Nova, turns out I've been answering at least one of your questions throughout these posts anyway:  Which characters suffered/which characters gained.  

 

Suffered: I do think Jaime goes into that column on the show, and through no fault of the actor either -- although I truly believe he would have benefited from reading the books and I don't think he did read them.   

 

Gained: Varys.  That's down, partially, to great casting on the part of the show.  I always end up wondering if they have trouble getting the actor and that's why he's not in the series as much as I'd like, but he's wonderful and the character, as written, skews too heavily towards near Kabuki levels of caricature when it comes to the whole "He's a Eunuch!" (genuine grammar confusion....would that be an Eunuch? I don't believe it would be, but my brain is mush this morning) The show never made him try that hard to have people NOT take him seriously.   

 

Left me nonplussed on development: Oh just name a character from The Wall arc and I'll just sit around looking confused as to the decision process.  On the Show the men of The Wall are horrifying, almost to a man.  If they aren't horrifying, they are almost to a man, dead.   Same deal for the Wildlings.  

 

Suffered from a werid casting choice (very rare on the show): Mance Raydar.   Look I love Ciarian Hinds, I really do, but he's just not the right pick for Mance and frankly, he really didn't put his back into the character for quite a while. 

 

Gained: Davos, what a delightful character on the show.  The actor makes him lovable very easily. 

 

Suffered: The Blackfish and Edmure Tully. 

 

Weird one for Gained:  Walder Frey.   Very rare for the show to actually make a villainous character more interesting, but that actor knocked it out of the creepy park and again, made Walder Frey a person and a scary, petty, vindictive one at that.  

 

Toss Up:  Petyr Baelish. The differences from Book to Series are marked: Baelish on the Show is truly interested in power, he lacks warmth but he's fascinating.  He isn't a sexualized character, at all....which makes his own "this is what shaped me" moment a little baffling:  The rejection by Cat in his childhood.  I swear to you, I thought it was going to turn out that Brandon Stark had in someway caused an injury to Petyr during that duel that left him incapable.  That's how desexualized the character is on the show.   It makes for a good choice when he interacts with Sansa and the actor has this cold, glittering "I am the god of chaos for the sake of it" thing going on that is amazing to behold. 

 

Gained: Drogo.  Man, I couldn't even picture him in the books.  Jason Momoa was great.  

 

Gained:  Jorah Mormont, who again, that one is down to casting.  

 

Suffered: The Entire Freaking Brotherhood Without Banners and the pirate Salla (sp? sorry, the funky spellings make it hard to commit them to memory).  

 

and then this:  

- some final remarks on Daenerys? Even though her arc was adapted pretty straightforwardly on the show, the overall feeling of her last chapter and the circumstances for Jorah’s banishment are pretty different.

 

I think that in the books Dany's fear in that moment is highly accessible and I'd have never guessed from the series that she thinks she's made a mistake, but that her pride is pricked by the "You must forgive me!" and it sits so poorly with her that she banishes him, when she knows she either needed to forgive him or kill him.   Book Dany recognizes in that moment that that she is making a mistake, but it kind of explores the perils of ruling anyone or anything.  

 

Also, on Daario, he's such an illustration from an Anime Version of a Harlequin Romance, I find it impossible to believe that Dany would want to have sex with him.  So for the strictly superficial:  I'm so glad they recast Daario, even if the charming actor makes it far less one of Dany's foibles instead of "Yup, pretty much, absolutely."  

 

Ones that I don't care that they eliminated: Strong Belwas.  I don't think that he was going to translate well onto screen.  Quaithe....I wish they'd done one or the other.  Eliminate her or keep her, but that weird walk-on they had Tile Face do was just mystifying and not in an intriguing manner. 

[Terra Nova]

@ambi76:

 

yeah, I didn't want to sound too aggressive with the show ^^' I think the production value of the first seasons was top notch, wonderful casting and most of CGI effects that wouldn’t look bad in a full length movie… I really, really wanted to love the show, from this point of view the first season was a dream come true, even the added scenes really helped flesh out the characters and it was apparent how they were trying to be faithful to the book counterparts.

 

But in later seasons some actors have been really underused, like Peter Dinklage in the past season, and I think anyway none here doubts he could have pulled a Tyrion much closer to the book character without effort; same for Emilia Clarke and Nicolaj Coster-Waldau who both suffered of poor writing, or Carice van Houten reduced to the boob-flashing woman. Not counting the increased number of plot-holes and general inconsistencies in pacing and some glaring retcon.

 

@nksarmi

I did actually mean what you already said about Sansa’s arc, that her plot will now continue along the original track. But this only enhances the feeling that season 5 for her was just really a waste of time, which is particularly baffling since Benioff and Weiss always tried to explain the cuts and mergings in the name of lack of time

 

@Holmbo

I think unfortunately for some of these arcs is too late: the Northern Lords in particular SHOULD have been in Winterfell for the wedding, that was the whole freaking point! Adding them now will only cause more plot-holes: ‘oh hi loyal Stark bannermen, you sure have been hiding under some frosty rock in the past few seasons! Where were you again?’

 

ETA:

@ Shimpy:

I don’t have quotes at the moment as a back up, but I’m pretty sure Nicolaj Coster-Waldau did read the books (I do remember several interviews with Gwendoline Christie with banter between them, and I’m dead sure she read the books when she learned that fandom was asking for her to play Brienne). On the other hand, that’s what the showrunners say about Jaime Lannister (at 2:10):

 

 

“The real Jaime Lannister isn’t the good looking, charming rogue… The real Jaime is the monster, he’s a beast and this [killing] is what he loves to do.”

 

So I’m not sure that the smugness he displays before shoving Bran from the window is really his idea.

 

For the rest of your post, thanks ^^ I think Daenerys is another character that suffers on screen, as since season three she seems to be stuck in ‘badass, detached’ mode. I understand the act she has to put on when playing the little Queen, but on screen this is almost never balanced by some more introspective scene where you can see the young doubtful girl behind the ‘mother of dragons’ myth. A little bit like Arya, which is reduced to the lovely fearless and spunky tomboy, as you yourself noted some pages ago.

 

ETA 2:

And God yes, the Blackfish! A nice, caring person turned in a rude, growling brute who first yells at Edmure, his nephew and liege lord, for being disrespectful to Robb, Edmure's nephew and his king. And then threatens physical harm when Edmure doesn't want to marry the Frey girl, while in the book Brynden left the Riverlands specifically after his brother tried to force him to marry (some part of the fandom also takes this as a hint that the Blackfish is actually gay).

Edited November 1, 2015 by Terra Nova

[Haleth]

I think for the most part the casting directors did a marvelous job choosing the perfect actors for the roles.  So many of them fleshed out their characters and greatly improved on their book counterparts in spite of some weird choices made by the show writers.  A lot of the best ones include the villains... the Hound, Tormund (not that I really consider him a bad guy), Alliser Thorne, Theon, and of course Cercei and Tywin. They all bring something that is relatable.  You can still dislike them (again, maybe not the Hound or Tormund) but you may also have a bit of an understanding of why they behave as they do.  And that is all on the wonderful actors.  If D&D got anything right, it's picking the right people, so kudos there.

[Reader of Books]

Shimpy, on the Dunk and Egg novellas: I was one of the ones who was in favour of waiting to read them.

 

After a discussion behind the spoiler tags I accept the arguments of the 'read them now' people. My objection is not a deal breaker and is probably outweighed by another situation. 

 

So I suggest read them now. They have the added benefit of being a bit of a 'palate cleanser' after all the significant incidents towards the end of the book just completed..

[Avaleigh]

I keep thinking that I'm going to be able to respond to the things that I want to respond to but when it comes to something like UnCat it's I've realized that I have to wait because all of my reasons for being fine with the show not including this so far would probably end up going into territory that's considered to be spoilery. Same with all of the recent Jaime/Cersei stuff. I was all set to comment and then I'm like 'damn it, so much of what I have to say includes info from later books.' I don't think I feel like I'll be able to properly comment until Shimpy is finished. 

 

That makes me lean toward AFFC being the next one up but I do also like the idea of starting on the Dunk and Egg novellas since there are so many of us who haven't read them. 

 

One thing where I feel like I'm out of step with many fans of the show/books is when I hear or read the claim that bad things only happen to anyone worth rooting for or bad guys don't get what's coming to them. I feel like we see bad guys pay but it seems like people want to see the Starks finally come back into their own now that we're closer to the end than we are to the beginning. 

 

The Mountain got payback, Viserys had a gruesome death, Lysa had to pay for getting and staying involved with a snake like Littlefinger, Joffrey had a painful, gruesome, and public death, Tywin died in a way that would have been his last choice (I honestly think he would have preferred being roasted by one of Dany's dragons if he'd had to choose between that and dying on the privy because of Tyrion), Jaime is currently paying for his sins as is Jorah, Balon pays and

loses everything

, in season 5 on the show

Stannis and Selyse both pay for their horrible choice.

, also in season 5

Cersei's imprisonment and walk, Janos Slynt's execution

, Karstark has to pay for murdering those two kids on the show, etc. I think Robert ultimately had to pay for being an asshole. Show Tickler, Trant, and Lorch each got theirs. We know more payback is coming but they can't get rid of all of the villains yet. 

[Seerow]

On the when to read the Novellas thing: I've never read them. I only read a summary of them for the first time about 6 months ago. I don't feel like I really missed out on anything for having done so. They are in general very detached from the main books, to the point where having read the novellas first will let you pick up a few minor easter eggs, and ties in to one reveal that you may or may not end up caring about... but that's about it. If what you're mostly interested in is how the books compare to the show? Skip the novellas completely, maybe check them out when you're done. But they're not necessary at all.

[Protar]

They're not necessary. But they're good reads, considerably more lighthearted than the main series, the last two books have easter eggs in them relating to the novellas and they won't take more than a few days to read. Giving generous time for discussion on here they would take at most a week. So I'm going to throw my vote into the pile to read D+E next. 

[Delta1212]

I've been pretty consistent in thinking Dunk & Egg would fit best after Storm, so doing that next gets my vote.

I like Strong Belwas, but there's a joke that makes me feel better about him not being included: He let the writers cut him once.

And yes, it's a eunuch. It begins with a long u so it doesn't get an 'an.' Like unicorn and university.

And on that subject, the theatricality of Varys and his many costume changes has led to some people speculating that he's not a eunuch at all in the books and that it's just another disguise that he wears, which could explain the caricatureness of his performance. (I'm not sold on this theory, but it does coincide with the point you made about his book character so I figured I'd offer it up).

[ElizaD]

One thing where I feel like I'm out of step with many fans of the show/books is when I hear or read the claim that bad things only happen to anyone worth rooting for or bad guys don't get what's coming to them. I feel like we see bad guys pay but it seems like people want to see the Starks finally come back into their own now that we're closer to the end than we are to the beginning.

 

I belong in the camp that believes this makes ASOIAF tough to read (and GOT is even tougher to watch). In the vast majority of cases the bad guys suffer less than their innocent victims, they are beaten by other assholes for reasons unrelated to their crimes, and their deaths don't lead to justice or triumph. Joffrey dying on top of the world and getting a fancy funeral/public praise is such a contrast to the degradation of people who tried to be decent (and after their deaths, that degration is extended to their corpses and reputations); same thing with the Mountain, killed by the brother of one of his victims - except Oberyn has to die too, so you don't start getting too hopeful. One of the lines that has always annoyed me is from a Jaime ASOS chapter: "I’ve lost a hand, a father, a son, a sister, and a lover, and soon enough I will lose a brother. And yet they keep telling me House Lannister has won this war" - he should think about what happened to the family of the little boy he crippled and stop whining that there were some consequences to his treason. Poor Jaime, sitting in his fancy office as Lord Commander to his bastard son while people whose lives he helped wreck and never felt sorry for are rotting in unmarked graves. IMO, the only truly gruesome bad guy fates are from ADWD:

Theon's state after his torture (by Ramsay, who doesn't give a damn about the murder of the two little boys) and the Freys in the pies (even then, Manderly has accepted the possibility that he'll have to die to get his vengeance)

. That's why I hated the removal of UnCat from the show: it made it feel like the Red Wedding didn't really matter and was simply business as usual, with nothing memorably ominous about the violation of the taboo of guestright. Bran's little story in the following episode meant nothing. No one cares, no one's angry, and watching UnCat hang a Frey would have been better than a ton of the stuff we ended up getting.

 

I'm also sad that the show didn't include the truth about Tysha. In addition to its impact on Tyrion's character, it's one of the very rare cases in which there's at least a little bit of justice: the man who ordered Tysha raped is killed because of that crime, not because some ruthless asshole or random psycho thought it would be useful or funny to have him out of the way. Like Oberyn vs. the Mountain it's no clear win, but it's still something that says a line has been crossed, that this cruelty is unacceptable. Tysha is someone we've never met, but she still matters despite being a nobody we only know through Tyrion's words and memories: a Hand of the King dies because he treated a commoner as trash to be humiliated and brutalized for daring to marry his son.

[Dev F]

I believe there are a number of us who haven't read the Dunk & Egg stories, so I would vote for jumping right into AFFC. I also think that in a way it would be in keeping with the original philosophy of the Unsullied, which is to see if the story holds up on its own without needing to be explained by supplemental material.
 
I guess it depends on whether you're primarily interested in the story of ASOIAF or the world. Me, I'm primarily interested in the story and think that one of the main weaknesses of the series is that Martin has a growing tendency to get distracted by all the world-building details and lose track of the main plot and central characters. So I'd argue for not enabling of his digressive tendencies by considering a completely separate story set decades before the main narrative to be essential to the tale. :)
 

It all still would have worked. The Tysha situation informed the actions of his whole life for basically a decade. It was still absolutely important to him.

 
Well, it is and it isn't. In the books, the Tyrion/Shae relationship is the direct and tragic result of his experiences with Tysha. In the show, that relationship is the hopeful repudiation of those experience. And I guess you could argue the Tysha reveal could still have motivated Tyrion's actions by suggesting that this hope had been undone -- but isn't that exactly what corrupting the Tyrion/Shae relationship already does? Again, it becomes a soap opera pile-on rather than a vital plot point: "Not only did your father's influence turn your true love back into an uncaring whore, but when you were a kid he turned your other true love into a whore as well!"

Edited November 2, 2015 by Dev F

[Gheed]

I think this has come up (I tend to skip some of the redundant discussions) but you should read Feast and Dance using Sean Collins unspoiled chapter guide. I just finished my re read last month using that guide and is was so much better reading it that way.

[Reader of Books]

it becomes a soap opera pile-on 

 

Tomato, tomato. 'Soap opera pile on' could be used in precisely the same way for the love affair as depicted in the show.

 

Also D+E 

I held off on them due to thinking they are just worldbuilding that was sidetracking him. That is indeed a huge factor, but they are actually more than mere world building on several points they inform events going forward.

I think this has come up (I tend to skip some of the redundant discussions) but you should read Feast and Dance using Sean Collins unspoiled chapter guide. I just finished my re read last month using that guide and is was so much better reading it that way.

 

There is a problem. Shimpy isn't reading a paper book with page numbers. She is reading e-books with '% complete'.

[Delta1212]

I think this has come up (I tend to skip some of the redundant discussions) but you should read Feast and Dance using Sean Collins unspoiled chapter guide. I just finished my re read last month using that guide and is was so much better reading it that way.

It did come up and I believe shimpy decided against it for reasons of personal preference and logistics.

[mac123x]

I picked up the Knights of the Old Republic, I mean, a Knight of the Seven Kingdoms last night and I'm already 1/2 way through it.  It's a very quick read since the book si padded out with illustrations.  So far (I'm in the middle of the second story) it hasn't added anything to the Song of Ice and Fire narrative.  "Mildly amusing" is the best I can do to describe it so far.

 

I think I'd recommend going directly to AFFC.

 

I can understand those too, Ambi and of course, I just didn't even touch the "Show Tyrells:  Make a composite character in the form of Loras....and that's not even going anywhere near the depiction of his sexuality" because that was one where if were using symbols to express feelings, it's closer to &^@#?!? BAM.

 

I definitely agree there.  We don't know a lot about the other brothers from the books, but Garlan's interactions with Sansa and Tyrion made him seem decent. and the fact that Wylas has friendly correspondence with Oberyn shows that he probably has a good head on his shoulders.  So "Lets take three kind, decent, honorable characters and mush them into one, then throw away all that and make his defining characteristic be that he sleeps with men" is baffling.

[Ashara Payne]

Shimpy, if you decide to go all-out for reading interviews, fan theories, supplemental show material, as well as YouTube vids of same, you'll find yourself with enough material to fill your entire leisure time for the next twenty years.

Its probably because of GRRM's notoriously slow writing speed that this has come about. People complain, but the poor chap is clearly a very sociable, gregarious person who is following an inherently lonely profession. Just his interviews alone show how much he loves to get out there and mix with people. One that I find amusing:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=snm6qnezv0Q

I struggle to think of similar book authors who are actual celebrities (JK Rowling maybe?)

I do hope we get the whole series before I die (although I'm younger than Martin so there's hope for me yet!) but I'm glad we'll get to see an ending of sorts (George has admitted on numerous occasions that he struggles with finishing stories).

As for Dunk & Egg, someone suggested reading the first two now, and the third after Feast. I would second that. There is also 'The Princess and the Queen' and 'The Rogue Prince', which I've not read but listened to on YouTube narrated beautifully by Iain Glenn. They can be left until after ASOIAF IMHO.

[stillshimpy]

I'm just going to let you guys figure out what you want me to jump into next, because I don't really have a dog in the hunt, but I do find Dev F's point to pretty much fit what I started out to do, which was to compare the Show to the Books:  

 

I guess it depends on whether you're primarily interested in the story of ASOIAF or the world. Me, I'm primarily interested in the story and think that one of the main weaknesses of the series is that Martin has a growing tendency to get distracted by all the world-building details and lose track of the main plot and central characters. So I'd argue for not enabling of his digressive tendencies by considering a completely separate story set decades before the main narrative to be essential to the tale. :)

 

I admit to being intrigued by both, but I'm not actually going to have anything to compare the novella's too, so I'll just be more of "Oh, well that's a good story...." experience.     I understand Dunk is "Ser Duncan the Tall" and "Egg" is presumably Aemon's brother, Aegon.  I this is from season five

When Aemon dies he says something like, "Egg, I dreamed I was an old man....", but he had mentioned his brother's name prior to that when he told Jon who he was.

 

I think this has come up (I tend to skip some of the redundant discussions) but you should read Feast and Dance using Sean Collins unspoiled chapter guide. I just finished my re read last month using that guide and is was so much better reading it that way.

 

Thank you for the suggestion, but I did decide against using those guides.   I'm really trying to see if I can keep things straight in my own head.  The details, etc.  Chances are not good on that, as I swear I can never remember the name of Davo's pirate friend.  Sallahor Saan?  Maybe? Sallador....yeah, I'm glad Kindles have highlight functions, because I don't objet to prompting myself through this stuff :-)

 

I belong in the camp that believes this makes ASOIAF tough to read (and GOT is even tougher to watch). In the vast majority of cases the bad guys suffer less than their innocent victims, they are beaten by other assholes for reasons unrelated to their crimes, and their deaths don't lead to justice or triumph.

 

I wholeheartedly and emphatically agree with this.  Oh poor Tywin died on the crapper.  After having had sex with a young, apparently skilled young woman and experience all of thirty five seconds of distress.  

 

Not really striking me as being true justice.  Plus, Bolton, the Freys, Ramsay currently all alive in the books.   There's nothing just or proportionate about the losses.  Hell, Jaime doesn't even give damn that Joffrey died, so it's difficult to really feel like "Oh, your sad, sad losses?" 

 

The reason Catelyn ended up in that river was they were mocking her family's burial custom.  It really does get any lower than feel a need to mutilate and degrade a corpse.  Ned Stark was convinced into admitting to a treason he did not commit, because it would be the kindest thing for those who loved him.  Instead he was killed anyway and the pain of his death was compounded.  

 

So I don't really buy the whole "Bad things happen to the people who have done terrible things"  there isn't enough bad that could happen to someone like Bolton or Ramsay -- oh my god -- Ramsay, by a lot.   The things that happen to the people trying to do good, or be decent are so incredibly awful.  

 

Really, the only person who does something treacherous and crappy who then pays for his treachery is Theon and oh my word, that just adds to the list of Ramsay's crimes against humanity and he doesn't do it as punishment for them.  Ramsay whittles away at Theon because he's there and Ramsay has power over him.  Presumably there's something about Ramsay wanting to punish the legitimate heir , blah blah blah, he has daddy issues too. 

[Protar]

Well I guess the only way to definitively sort out what you're reading next is a poll. Could we set one up?

[ambi76]

Daddy issues. Daddy issues everywhere. Well, GRRM has to work out his own (which he has openly talked about) somehow I guess.

 

I don't much care in which order shimpy goes on but I wonder if she would be a bit confused by

that whole lost generation of Targaryens on the show i.e. Aemon being Dany's great-great-uncle instead of great-uncle.

Although I think Jaehaerys II was already mentioned by Barristan as Dany's grandfather in ASOS, so she knows it's not Aegon V in the books.

Edited November 1, 2015 by ambi76

[WindyNights]

I would say read Dubk and Egf first. They're quick reads. And it does add some thing to the story.

[ImpinAintEasy]

I vote for reading the 'Dunk And Egg' stories next. They are qick, enjoyable reads. There are quite a few 'Easter Eggs' in the next two books that you will notice because you read the D&E tales. Most notably

Bloodraven = Three Eyed Crow and more backstory on the Blackfyres(which could be important with "Aegon").

[Haleth]

I really have no interest in Dunk and Eggs, so if you all decide to go there, I'll catch you on the flip side.

[Triskan]

Yeah, I'd rather shimpy starts reading Feast, but it's her choice and the D&E are really quick to read, so whatever she decides I'll be there ! ^^

[Seerow]

I'm just going to let you guys figure out what you want me to jump into next, because I don't really have a dog in the hunt, but I do find Dev F's point to pretty much fit what I started out to do, which was to compare the Show to the Books:

 

First, you're probably not going to get a consensus on this point. Some of the more... shall we say dedicated members of the fandom (many of whom are likely the sort more likely to participate in a thread like this one), are going to insist because they are written, and because there are minor tie-ins, they are necessary. There are others who just see it as a pointless detour, an excuse to explore more of what Westeros was like before the events of the War of Five Kings, during what is essentially a peacetime (not to say that nothing happens in the Novellas, just that it's not in the middle of giant earth shaking events like the main series novels are),

 

For what it's worth I completely agree with Dev F's point. You gain nothing in terms of examining the story by reading Dunk and Egg. I'm sure it's a fun story, but it doesn't actually focus on any characters who are even directly related to anyone in our main narrative. You can explore that at your leisure at a later time, or even after having finished the main novels, if you want... but given the primary context of this thread it feels like even more of a waste of time than GRRM writing them in the first place.

 

 

Edit: Anyway back to the main point: You can't punt the decision back to us, because we aren't going to reach one. Your best bet is a poll as someone suggested above, but honestly I feel like it's best if you make an informed decision on your own, knowing what each choice represents.

 

Edited November 1, 2015 by Seerow